Luther Freedom Analysis of Martin

Luther Freedom

Analysis of Martin Luther's on the Freedom of a Christian

It is not by accident that Martin Luther is known as the father of the Reformation. His attacks on the practices and abuses of the Catholic Church caused major religious and political upheavals, and his writings on theology and the philosophy of Christianity continue to be major influences both within various branches of Christianity and in the wider world of philosophy and even of political science, to some degree. The profound departure of his ideas from many of the Church doctrines that were held during his day and age, and that had perpetuated the wealth of Church officials and their allies in the monarchies and governments of most of Europe, ended with the eventual creation of several separate Christian sects that no longer perceived any attachment to Rome or to the pope there enthroned. This was not ever Martin Luther's explicit intent; he truly intended to reform the Church and not to break with it, but his attacks on the corruption that existed in Rome and its officers were met with great resistance that eventually forced tensions to the breaking point.

The seeds of this separation on both political and theological grounds can be seen in Luther's treatise On the Freedom of a Christian and the letter to Pope Leo X that accompanied it when it was sent to Rome prior to its wider publication. In the letter, Luther strikes an initially conciliatory tone, assuring the pope that he means no personal disrespect and is even uninterested in debates on moral grounds or any personal attacks on any individuals. He goes on, however, to deride the massive corruption that exists in the Church and to insist that he will continue fighting for the truth in the word of God and its fair and honest application to the Christian people of the world despite -- and in fact in spite of -- the bastardization of this truth by many Church officials.

Letter to Pope Leo X

It would be unfair and incomplete to analyze Luther's On the Freedom of a Christian without taking into account the explanation he provides for this treatise in his letter to Pope Leo X. In this letter, Luther makes it clear that he considers Leo X to be an honorable man with good intentions and a humble heart, but that his station as the head of the Holy See makes it impossible for him to effectively behave in the ways that his inherent and native goodness would in other circumstances require. Comparing him to Daniel surrounded by lions and Ezekiel living amongst scorpions, Luther acknowledges that Leo is somewhat stuck in his political office and cannot necessarily discern whose intentions are truly honorable and whose are purposed to serve their own stature and increase the corruption of the Church. Luther goes into many specifics about certain individuals, periods, and actions, but these are not of great importance in this context.

More important is the attitude with which Luther wrote the treatise that he enclosed along with this letter to the Pontiff that he still called his "holy father": there is a fervent desire to reform the Church and the pope's actions in every word of the treatise. This is the primary impulse behind most of Luther's famous tracts, and in this letter he demonstrates his overriding belief that his theological interpretation of Biblical teachings as presented in On the Freedom of a Christian is correct and is sorely needed not for the purpose of Luther's own exaltation, but to restore humility to the Church. The Church and its pope -- as well as its many cardinals, bishops, and other officers -- are meant to be servants of God in bringing his message to the people in an honest, forthright, and incorruptible manner. Reading the treatise without this context runs the risk of missing its essential argument.

On the Freedom of a Christian

This central argument can actually be summed up in relative simplicity. Due to the forgiveness that is extended to every Christian by their faith in Christ as pronounced in the New Testament, Luther argues, all Christians are free to act in any way they please. When they continue to behave according to God's law as it is written in the Bible, they do so of their own free will; acts of charity and kindness are nto something that is required in order to receive forgiveness, but rather is an outgrowth of the charity and kindness that exists in people's hearts regardless of the status of their salvation, which is already assured so long as their faith is pure and strong. This quite obviously limits the power of the Church as far as condemning acts of any kind is concerned; even one found guilty of heresy would, according to Luther's argument, still receive salvation through their faith in Jesus Christ as the savior of all mankind, who died to redeem man's sins.

The argument as Luther lays it out in this treatise is, of course, far more complex than this above summary implies. He distinguishes the two natures of man as being spiritual and bodily. The spirit or soul of man, Luther goes on to insist, is neither harmed by nor gains benefit from anything that affects the body of man. Sacred offices and vestments mean as little to a man's soul as riches and luxury -- they means absolutely nothing, as a matter of fact. It is only faith that has an effect on the soul, Luther argues, and in fact other Christian virtues can be seen as extensions of faith and not separate means to gaining the rewards of salvation and justification that faith provides. This is largely the crux of Luther's argument, explaining why faith is necessary and actions are meaningless to those that would seek salvation in the Christian perspective.